Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 26, 2006 20:33:24 GMT -5
Well, count me in as convinced Hauptmann wrote all of the ransom notes and that CJ was Hauptmann. Are there any other realistic candidates? I'm not saying Hauptmann was alone at Woodlawn or St. Raymond's, but he was there.
Yes, CJ's plan ultimately worked but the gist of my point was that his involvement in the kidnapping and his actions in the cemetery negotiations, in my opinion, indicate he was mentally ill. I would also place a good bet on CJ having been under the influence of some substance in order to acquire the necessary nerve it took to do what he did.
I'm not sure CJ necessarily trusted Condon implicitly, but he did recognize and took full advantage of his sincerity and was also aware of his known reputation for years of faithful public service in the Bronx. It also appears CJ recognized the good possibility of pulling down $50,000 for a corpse was well worth the risk he was willing to take.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 27, 2006 5:22:44 GMT -5
It's almost impossible not to deviate or wander off on tangents isn't it?
That wasn't my original thought but still possible. I was thinking more like the possibility Dr. Baden suggested. He clearly presented a case that says we cannot eliminate smothering or a similar method because all the evidence wasn't collected and properly examined.
Fair enough. I am 50/50 on Hauptmann writing the notes. I am 20/80 that he was the Author. And I don't believe he was CJ because there is no evidence he was until Condon is forced to identify him as such after being threatened even though he had said it wasn't him. On top of that a neutral third party who was there, Reihl, said it wasn't him.
Constantly lying and telling tall tales to the Police isn't being sincere. Neither is perjury. Furthermore, this idea that Condon was highly regarded by all in the Bronx simply isn't true. And there were the charges of rape against that minor who, in some versions of events, became pregnant.
So why not $70,000 then Joe? In fact, the Papers were offering $25,000 to act as intermediaries but no, they take up Condon's $1,000 offer but then refuse that too.
It makes no sense if everything is as it should be.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 27, 2006 7:26:00 GMT -5
I don't "discount" anything that actually occurred. By the same means I try not to exaggerate it either. I have learned much from the little reading I have done so far on prior kidnappings and one of the major points is that kidnappings or extortion tend to really bring a lot of characters out of the woodwork. Another point learned is that the LKC is not unique when it comes to strange and puzzling occurrences.
Cal jr was not the first or last child to be killed either accidentally of purposefully by the abductor. It is actually quite common among the child kidnappings.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 27, 2006 7:28:52 GMT -5
No, Condon didn't readily and immediately identify CJ as Hauptmann. I believe he wanted to be absolutely certain and was also genuinely fearful for his own safety having now found himself potentially in the sights of Hauptmann's accomplices. Riehl's detailed account of the slightly built man in the white shirt, on top of the stone column tells me Riehl did not see the same individual (CJ) who was talking to Condon at ground level and who then clambered over the iron fence. In my opinion, when Condon, after his "non-declaration," lamented that his life wasn't worth two cents, he really did believe there were others still out there.
I haven't seen any clear basis in fact for these charges against Condon and they certainly seem to stand far apart from the over 40 years of dedicated and close school association with children of all ages. It does seems clear from many of the accounts we read, Condon was progressively losing his short term memory, while at the same time having lost none of his tendency to embellish his personal accounts and words. If he was obscuring the truth I feel it had more to do with him possibly not fully realizing what he had previously said or done. Or what he was interpreted as having said. I also believe it was important to him to remain in good favour of, and put his trust in his hero Lindbergh as well as Breckinridge.
Put yourself in Condon's shoes at the age of 72 and knowing of his general background, experiences and desire for public attention, would his involvement in this case not have truly represented the crowning achievement to his life's work, a term he actually used himself? I know this desire wouldn't necessarily have advanced the case or brought about the return of Charlie any sooner. It does though demonstrate how sometimes erratic human behaviour causes the course of world events to be shaped and how we as individuals then try to separate fact from favour despite the ultimate reality of the situation.
I believe CJ simply succumbed to plain greed and upped the amount from $50,000 to $70,000 when the kidnapping became public news and various larger amounts were speculated upon in the papers. According to the nursery note directions, this was not originally intended to become a "world event," and it was in the following notes, and concurrent with the kidnappers admonishing Lindbergh for calling the police, that the amount was raised.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 27, 2006 10:53:35 GMT -5
Well Joe, it should be quite evident by now that Jafsie the Don of cons is no hero, and either a bold face liar, senile/crazy or both! As a go-between he earns a flat zero....unless well paid for his services?
In terms of his identifications of CJ, if there was one, well, whoever opined that JFC was keeping all of his options open by iding nearly everyone in the Bronx--well I subscribe to that. At some point or another, he I.Ds: Isador Fisch with the lumpy thumb and the hacking cough, who could be Doc Nosovitsky? Then later its John Gorch from Philly who is Italian and heavy set. Gorch looks like a ringer for Wendel. So, although I believe that Condon knew it WAS NOT BRH, he was threatened and coerced like everyone else on the Persecution of saying "yes it was" after saying "I can never finger this man"! He likely would have be charged as a co-defendent if he didnt bend and break/
We can no longer count the number of his lies and fabrications. One of his best was misleading the BOI into thinking that Frank Perimi made the ransom box with 5 tropical ro rare woods. he knew this to be a falsehood and knew Abe Samuelsohn well for years. Explain that one/ Then, on top of that, according to Means, Condon "threw the ransom over the fence" and threw the box into the bushes where he was observed picking it up later (MM). We can only imagine that he also lied about his boat trip to meet John, and Doc, and the spanish kidnappers in Long Island. DYBT?
All in all Condon was an abject failure and if not a syncophant for CAL would have ended up in jail just like Means and Curtis.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 27, 2006 12:02:01 GMT -5
Come on Rick, aren't you being a bit hard on the old guy? Your linear cause and effect logic here really boils down to an absolute equation that glosses over the day to day dynamics of Condon's involvement in the ransom negotiations and afterwards: Sum of all Condon's Efforts X Child's Death (0) = 0 Remind me never to step foot in your court. Those crossed swords above the exit are probably functional
|
|
|
Post by carol on Jul 27, 2006 14:49:14 GMT -5
Joe, Rick sees Condon for exactly what he was. How do you explain the number of times he changed his story? Senility or just plain lying?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jul 27, 2006 16:10:53 GMT -5
I for one would be mighty hard pressed to muster any compliments for John Condon. If police reports are correct he had inappropriate conduct on occasions with children. Narcissistic in caps, continually grabbing at grandiosity, a pathological liar, which clearly reveals itself in his inability to remember which lie he told when. I'll bet the prosecution boys put him through some stringent practice sessions before they ever risked putting him on the stand! The authorities were suspicious of him throughout, as well they should have been. That purported testimonial from CJ about how trustworthy Condon was and what a fine job implied , to my mind was JFC's lie, because he did recognize the police didn't trust him. He'd make the books as a dandy case study , in my view.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 27, 2006 16:21:32 GMT -5
I'm sorry Joe, but its pretty hard to sugar coate Condons actions and tall tales in a Capital Murder/Kidnap case. He even forgets to I>D. the second cabbie? Maybe his only saving grace will be to sacrifice The Truth and BRH to save himself and someone else higher up from the gallows, but as it stands now:
Sum of Condon's lies and obfuscations X BRHs execution = >0
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 28, 2006 6:11:36 GMT -5
Saint or sinner? The more relevant question here is, what could possibly be Condon's motive ? If you incorporate JFC into the crime, then who orchestrates this group of miscreants ? Who is your Professor Moriarty?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 28, 2006 7:23:35 GMT -5
Condon is probably one of the most fascinating among the cast of characters involved in the case. All roads of discussion seem to continually lead back to him.
Now over the years I'd say Joe probably has the most sympathetic position towards him - so he tends to draw alot of attention to his comments. It's the nature of the beast, so to speak, so when I present my points its more of an effort to better understand everyone's perspective by drawing out further facts....
He said it wasn't him. For whatever reason he said that I am sure we all have our theories. His stupid explanation later on was merely meant to "save face" and nothing more... There are many instances and examples of this. I do agree with you that Condon was afraid of accomplices.
I think we both have considered Reihl walked upon one or more "others" during his approach. This doesn't explain why Condon inserts Reihl's approach into his tale and/or why John and Condon seemed to be different people to Reihl. Reihl knew who Condon was and what he looked like.
There are grown adults coming forward today against people who did things to them when they were little. It is not an easy thing to talk about and it wasn't easier then but much much harder. It could have been a false accusation but its something to consider nevertheless.
If Condon was losing his "short term" memory then how does one explain the loss of his "long term" memory? And not only that, his short term memory loss only occurs at certain times - but he seems to become very coherent when the Police start to threaten him. Suddenly everything becomes so much clearer when that occurs.
Condon was a BS artist. He's one of those guys who could talk to you about something for an hour and say absolutely nothing of value - and he knew what he was doing in my opinion - it seems to be by design which leads me to the irresistible conclusion as to why these people utilized him. He was known to them and them to him - just like he said in his riddle 'speak.' Watch the videos of him at the NJSP Archives talking to the camera and watch his demeanor change drastically once he believes he is off camera.
Both Lindbergh and Breck, despite testifying to the contrary, had said at differing times they did not trust him. I truly don't believe Condon was such the Lindbergh supporter as you are making him out to be.
Greed. It's not greedy to pass on $20,000 extra from Lindy. It's not greedy to pass on an extra $25,000 from the Newspapers. It's not greedy to pass on the extra $1,000 from Condon. Condon leads us to believe CJ is conscientious and spares both him and CAL the additional pain from the loss this extra money would cause.
Now would someone who murdered this child be thinking in this way? Greed simply does not satisfy this situation... There is something more here.
It could be he was brought in unwillingly with something being held "over his head." Possibly involving a female, a crime (such as a shady land deal), or someone calling in a favor.
It could also be something as he told O'Sullivan. See page 100 of The Case That Never Dies (Dr. Gardner). In fact, his entire chapter on Jafsie is a "must read."
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 28, 2006 8:37:48 GMT -5
Kevin: you always ask hard questions? But here is where the genius of Ellis Parker comes to the rescue: We need two separate masterminds (MM)!
1. One MM at Highfields to take command of the actual, half-actual or staged kidnap over the weekend of 27 Feb 1932. Put all the pieces into place and wipe away any extra evidence.
2. We then need another MM (no pun intended) in the Bronx to engineer the ransom negotiations and etc. This group seems to center around the Temple of Occult and Divine Power and....Mary Cerrita, Peter Birritella, Izzy Fisch acrossed the street, maybe Violet Sharpe and Ollie Whateley at Sunday meditations. I think Fisch gets the most votes for CJ, and forger, and money launderer etc and quarterback. Everyone provides him an alibi to protect themselves, especially Charlie Schleser.
3. And last but not least enter stage Left is JFC--to link these 2 happy little groups together and insure that noone, well almost, noone gets arrested or caught or convicted. He did his very best to transfer the payments whilst misleading everyone down the garden path in the wrong direction!
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 28, 2006 16:40:15 GMT -5
So you now have at least ten people involved in this crime of the century and they all get a piece of the action? That makes 50 k seem awfully small even in depression terms. So who is on first? Who is the mastermind of this most incredible plot? What is Condon's motive? Why would such a man willingly get involved in such a serious crime? Why wouldn't Hauptmann spill his guts? There he is sitting in his cell with The Chair next to him and he remains silent?
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 28, 2006 17:33:28 GMT -5
I agree that Condon is one of the most fascinating characters in this case. I think his real original intent and actual role are among the least understood today, and because of his personality and erratic behaviour, widely misinterpreted. There's also a large element of tragedy within his legacy in the same league as that of Lindbergh and Hauptmann, which is unfortunate, in light of a lifelong and well-documented devotion to public service and his community.
My overall view of Condon, Michael, is far more neutral than you imply is roundly perceived. Perhaps much of the recent growling and howling of derision against him just makes me appear to be more sympathetic than I truly am.
I'm not sure what the "stupid explanation" is but there is an interesting conundrum here. Right after the failed identification, Condon told Turrou he was afraid his life wasn't worth two cents and that Hauptmann's accomplices were now going to kill him. Does Turrou's account not imply that Condon was withholding identification of Hauptmann for reasons of self-preservation?
From Riehl's account, I don't believe he even saw CJ. Who he did describe, perched on the top of the 14' stone column, was a slightly-built man dressed entirely differently from the manner in which Condon described CJ. I'm still a bit perplexed by Riehl's off-base description to detectives of Condon. Unless perhaps his vision was partially obscured and / or Condon was in the shadows and Riehl really didn't get a good look because of his focus on the other figure.
|
|
|
Post by Perched Perch on Jul 28, 2006 18:15:28 GMT -5
I don't understand. I thought Condon said only one person was at the cemetery (ie CJ). Didn't he see the guy perched up there? And why didn't Riehl see the third guy climb over the fence?? Was it ever claimed back then that there were two people who met with Condon?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jul 28, 2006 19:29:44 GMT -5
Hi Joe~ "howling and growling" (Condon). Good description. I must say it brought me a smile . He's a frustrating character for sure. I agree his role in the LKC is quite interesting. As to his saying his life wasn't worth two cents, I've wondered just who he really feared. The other kidnap conspirators or the authorities? ( some writer, I forget which, indicated he was also roughed up by the police). You spoke of a tragic legacy-CAL, BRH and Condon. Would you please elaborate as it refers to Condon? Did he not enjoy some celebrity in the close aftermath? I have often wondered about Condon's life after BRH's execution. Other than his book and some magazine interviews I would really like to know what he did in those 9-10 years afterwords. Thanx
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 28, 2006 20:41:39 GMT -5
Ok Kev, but this is just a rough framework so far/ a work in progress:
Lets make it an even dozen perps/ OK? Lets put 6 in the kidnap gang1 and 6 in the extortion gang2...give or take 1 or 2? Now the real deal is that they all dont get paid (some die or disappear) and those that do get paid all dont get equal shares. After all JJ Faulkner only cashed $3K so even 12 times 3 is still only $36K? (leaving $14 for Fisch>BRH)
Kidnap gang1 needs some drivers? After all they have to get over to Englewood or Highfields, right? (With a ladder) Chauffeurs make good drivers and one in a green sedan had some Gold certs up in CT so lets pick...Henry Ellerson, Duane Baker with the bulgy eyes, Red Johnson might come in handy as well? Its a start? There might even be a second chauffeur at Next Day? (You cant have too many drivers) The Temple Players must be in Gang A since Mary constructs the occult Symbol and shows up with Peter in only 4 days with JFCs initials? How about Al Reichs light green Ford coupe too?
But something goes very wrong! Charlie falls out the window, or down the stairs, or someone backs over him with a car/ whatever-- so the kidnap gang1 ends up with damaged goods. They panik big time. Things are not going according to Hoyle? Hot Potatoe! They need an exit strategy and fast.
Charlie, now damaged, is taken over by Gang B...the extortion gang2. After all, they didnt get Charlie hurt, they just want the $50K for his safe return. Gang A, just wants no part of further negotiations--just anonimity! Most drop out/refusing payments.
Condon may come into the picture for personal reasons as mentioned by MM. To protect a family member, or his own reputation. Maybe because of a threat of violence against his family? He is likely well known by both gangs A and B? So he comes in to smooth over any rough spots....eg like a dead Charlie? Also, dont forget there could always be more money paid out than the money Condon throws over the fence to CJ? Means and Whittaker take home a smooth $100K not accounted for and there could always be some other money paid under the table secretly.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 29, 2006 6:41:27 GMT -5
Rick, you have a helluva creative mind! Problem is, for me anyway, is that as I look around at the cast of characters in this case I don't see anyone who is in your league. I see greed, pride, ego , but not much creativity ( excepting the singnature and ladder). Who would be able to formulate such a grand scheme and execute it? Where is this evil genius? And he would be a genius, because what you are proposing is a kidnap without precedent. Leopold and Loeb pale in comparison to this arch villain. But who do you propose he is?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 29, 2006 7:34:15 GMT -5
Good question Kevin, but I dont hold a ready answer/ we may have to work backwards by a process of elimination? Kidnap gang1 seems to include insider Morrow/Lindbergh servants the likes of Violet or Ollie or Ellerson or Betty or Red? (maybe they work for free?) Extortion gang2 seems to include Fisch, Schleser,and DiGrasi from Knickebocker Pie Co. What we can surmise at the outset is that anyone who spends $10 Gold Certs for gas isnt our evil genius/ "This snatch has been planned for over one year"? At present Condon is the glue that holds it all together. After all, he appears to visit Fisch in CT and was named right or wrong as an attender at the Occult Temple? We will need a few more puzzle pieces turned over.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 29, 2006 8:58:28 GMT -5
Cemetery Patrolman Riehl, interviewed on July 19, 1932, when asked about a description of the man he had observed on top of the stone column, says: "I could not describe his face or give the colour of his hair as it was too dark to see it, but to the best of my judgment, he was about 5' 6" or 7" in height, weight about 130 or 135 lbs., and from his action while running I would judge him to be about 23 or 24 yrs. old, dressed with dark pants, white shirt, no coat on, and wearing a cap. When this man hollered I did not notice Foreign accent in speech."
From Riehl's vantage point coming up to the gate, I theorize the figure he saw on top of the stone column was not CJ, but an accomplice, quite possibly Fisch. There is a front and back to the top portion of the stone column, and I believe Condon, on the outside, may not have even noticed this figure, who would have been partially concealed to him. Riehl, approaching from inside the cemetery and who was obviously focussed on this figure on high, may not have even seen CJ period, who at the same time, was talking to Condon through the bars of the fence some distance away, at ground level.
In his various accountings of events, I believe Condon does make at least one veiled reference to a shadowy third figure at Woodlawn. If anyone can add detail here, please do.
It's just a theory of mine at this point, but Riehl's description of the perched figure may provide credible support to at least one accomplice at Woodlawn. For a good appreciation of the style and height of the stone column Riehl was referring to, see Waller's Kidnap, pg. 406 photo section.
|
|
|
Post by gismo on Jul 29, 2006 9:10:40 GMT -5
Very interesting, Joe!
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 29, 2006 9:33:07 GMT -5
Hi Mairi. My personal read on Condon's comments are that he was 90% sure Hauptmann was CJ but wanted to be absolutely certain. There was no doubt some difference in appearance which could be attributed to the fact Condon never got a good look full faced look at one time during his meetings with CJ, Hauptmann had gained weight between this and the last meeting, and that he was unshaven, dishevelled and near the point of physical exhaustion having not slept for a few days. Condon's comment to Agent Turrou that his life wasn't worth two cents and that Hauptmann's accomplices were going to kill him tells me at that point, he did believe CJ was Hauptmann.
Condon, because of his involvement in the case and the notoriety he gained, lost his part time lecturing position at Fordham University. He did a brief stint appearing in store windows with replicas of some of the kidnapping items and also lectured at a number of public venues. The way I see his tragedy is that a lifelong record of public service and community involvement are so grossly overshadowed by the failed results of his participation in a situation that was clearly beyond his control from the very beginning. This despite his best original intentions, however naive, to assist someone he idolized. According to Richard Sloan, who conducts the Bronx Tour of NYC / LKC sites, with the exception of his daughter, Myra Hacker, his relationship with the rest of his family was irrevocably strained as a result of his participation in the case. This information came from a family friend of the Condons.
|
|
Kaiser Soze for Kevin
Guest
|
Post by Kaiser Soze for Kevin on Jul 29, 2006 13:40:58 GMT -5
Kevin/ somewhere there is a thread called Usual Suspects? My criteria for mastermind:
1. Stays in the background "controlling" anonymously 2. Puts the fear of God into everyone 3. Has a rock solid alibi for any real criminal activity 4. Is never even suspected 5. When name is mentioned everyone says Not Him/ 6. Is seldom even questioned or arrested 7. Gets away clean as a whistle, never heard from again
Why did Condon need a bodyguard anyways? Didnt Condon once report that at Woodlawn CJ went over to talk to two of his co=conspirators? Later this is retracted/
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 29, 2006 19:13:05 GMT -5
The BS line about proclamation and identification or some other such nonsense. Here is what Condon told Special Agent Turrou: In a subsequent conversation, however, he indicated that he was not going to identify the man because he was doubtful whether Hauptmann was John. he said that Hauptmann bears a great likeness to his (Hauptmann's) brother, who was the real John, and with whom he made the contact at the cemetery. He asserted that the real John was killed long ago and that the money was taken away from him by his confederates. he intimated that the real men who are responsible for the kidnaping and murder of the Lindbergh child are now somewhere in Long Island, around Bayshore. This doesn't sound like 90% certainty, rather, it sounds like 100% certainty that Hauptmann wasn't John. Now after Condon boasted to Turrou that he had a "remarkable memory" and that he could never make an error in identification - he tells him - before telling him Hauptmann is not John - that "his life wasn't worth five cents" and that "'They' are going to kill him." I have the same question Mairi has, that is, who is he talking about? The Police or the Kidnappers?
|
|
|
Post by rick for joe on Jul 29, 2006 21:20:06 GMT -5
Joe/ its a loosing battle to support Condons BRH identification. Condon was all over the map unless the two Cjs at Woodlawn and St. Raymonds were totally unrelated? Condon went all the way to Boston to I.D. John Gorch. Any person that mixes up Fisch and Gorch is either wildly guessing, purposely hosing/misleading us all, totally senile or a combination of all 3?
Try to figure how both Condon and BRH could be in AS's store multiple times? its a wonder they didnt bump into each other on the street?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 30, 2006 9:58:37 GMT -5
I wonder at times if the assessments of Condon are not compromised to some degree by an inability to understand the time he lived in. I mean that Condon seems to be a character of an age even prior to the LKC. No, I am not making an excuse for all of his actions here. But he may be a difficult character to examine by the light of 20th century standards. What can I say, I am a sucker for losing battles.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Jul 30, 2006 13:15:19 GMT -5
Michael, I think it's very important to try and establish what Condon said and when, relative to his refusal to identify Hauptmann. What you've quoted here, as the account seems to imply, is from a subsequent interview. My question then is what exactly did Turrou claim Condon told him when they met immediately following Condon's original refusal to identify Hauptmann. Was it not at this September 20 meeting that he claimed Hauptmann's accomplices were going to kill him?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jul 30, 2006 16:31:34 GMT -5
Kevkon~I agree with your point. It's not always easy to put one's self back into the context of a past era. I think to enhance insight it's really important to work at doing that, though.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jul 30, 2006 16:55:07 GMT -5
Joe~Your ref to strain in Condon's family except for daughter Myra, is interesting. Somehow in my reading I had a sort of sense she was disapproving of him. Viewed from another angle, perhaps her disapproval was her thought that he was endangering himself(?) I can see you believe Condon idolized CAL. I have to at least wonder though, if it may have been a matter of wanting to "out-hero" a hero.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jul 30, 2006 20:25:08 GMT -5
Is it possible that Condon, BRK n' CAL blew it bigtime on March 12th at Woodlawn? Is JFC responsible for Charlie Jrs demise?
""Mr. Condon We trust you, bring mony with you"(letter)
"Bring the money! But we havent got the money" says Col. Breckenridge
"No matter" Condon replied, "there isnt much time and I'll have to hurry".
Jafsie had previously posted "Money is ready" NYAmerican So now, genius upon genius, JFC alone decides to show up without the money? Do we know for certain that Charlie Jr. was dead on March 12th and that the gang intended to double-cross CAL? Maybe everything changed drastically as negotiations dragged on and on into April? After all, Condon publishes "baby alive and well" the next day?
[Could Jafsie have been able to identify or pickup a Dr. Denton #2 by French leave at Highfields the week before?]
|
|